The Nature of Time

The Einstein equations should be treated like an equilibrium condition for a spacetime continuum made of a large number (>10^80) of gravitons that are very large (>10^5 km wide).

When gravitons are small, they participate in quantum mechanics as wave functions.

The observation products generated are new products not the ancient past happening.

As a theist, I think that God set the physics constants. From that premise, all physics is built upon those constants. Furthermore, there is an underlying structure to physics that would explain the nature of time, spatial dimensions, energy, momentum, rotation, etc. The non ID explanation doesn't go anywhere and is not useful. Ewe

What do you mean by the non ID explanation?

"Non" ID means Non Intelligent Design. Atheists like Richard Dawkins have literally tried to explain away the intelligent design of this universe by assuming that there are 10^10^30 other accidental universes. The result is that quantum mechanics gets represented as some kind of magic probability machine that spits out universes at random, also known as the MANY WORLDS INTERPRETATION of quantum mechanics. But if you assume that the universe looks intelligently designed because it is intelligently designed, then you end up with an intuitive correlation between quantum momentum and general relativity.

Atheists claim that "God of the gaps" proves that God doesn't exist. But in reality, it "God of the gaps" is when God gives hints about how the universe works.

*future* to *present* to *past* A-series

*earlier* times to *later* times B-series

What do people think? My own opinion is that we need *both* series to characterize time.

McTaggart,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_series_and_B_series

'Future' 'present' and 'past' can be used as part of a description of observation, and experience. In that case the future is what I call the 'pre-written future', which is electromagnetic radiation (EM), and other potential sensory inputs, in the environment not yet received. After the signal has been received, it can be known that it was prior to that the pre-written future of that observer. The received sensory input is used in the generation of the observer's experienced present.Later the experienced present may be incorporated into memories or records. When the experience/s have been superseded, it could be said to be past. As observers are at different locations, signals from same material events are received at different times giving non simultaneity of observed events (Think of a thunder storm). Earlier and later pertain to a fixed sequence. That applies to material happenings in the environment external to observers.From which the potential sensory inputs are emitted or reflected.

I think the future is a lot like the stock market. It's hard to predict, especially with all that free will involved.

As for time travel, the laws of physics don't seem to allow for it.

The vacuum is the soup, a dynamic process we call Time.

The Planck h is the total allowed amplitude of time rate variations

Our whole universe lies inside this h amplitude.

Gravity is a measure of the explosive deficit some structure creates.

Two ways: 1) logical substitution or, how much vacuum the stuff of the structure replaces 2) Shadow deficit; the amount of deficit caused by the structure. Imagine a point like source of light at the geometric center of the structure (electron, proton etc. photon,,) and see if it would project a shadow; place the light in the middle of a linear EM wave = no shadow. Place the light at the center of the proton, a ring wave like a lampshade, big shadow. This explains (?) the difference photon and proton masses.

...??? Proton ring wave ?? see poster at below url at item 16.1 (awfully old website..)

[link:www.angelfire.com/ak/mlebel/] [/ item 16.1 ]

Marcel,

we need indeed an universal balance for the charges, or protons and electrons or positrons, or matter anti matter or entropy negentropy or cold and heat, personally I consider this DM in the cold and encoded also in our nuclei, what is for you a photon really and what is this DM for you ?

the time is just a duration for me correlated with the motions and probably the rotations in my model, this time seems irreversible respecting the entropical arrow of time, we d have a problem of mass equivalence due to evolution. This time is not a thing that we can check in fact in logic. The vacuum is not really the time but more than this, like the space it is more than this, it is probably made of main codes even and these codes need fuels to create the emergent luminiferous space time, so maybe when the photons and the cold dark matter merge with this coded space withpout motion, they create our geonetries, topologies, matters simply, the time is correlated so with their motions and is relative in function of observations and how we analyse it

of course we know that this time due to GR and SR is a tool when we observe our spacetime and these photons, so we see our past like we see our sun 8,2 min in late , it is just because we have this photonic space time at high velocities and this GR so explaining the gravitation at these high velocities with the curvatures at the difference of Newton at slow velocity interpreting it like a force between all mass, but this time is just a duration probably linked like I told with the rotations and motions, without time, we have no evolution , and without evolution we don t exist, it is also the meaning of my theory of spherisation, this optimisation of the universal sphere or future sphere, this time is not odd and is just a parameter like the others to create our physicality, it is different in the sense that it is not made of particles but it is linked with the rotations of these particles and their duration simply,

the gravitation needs a cause that said, that is why we search this quantum gravitation , this weakest quantum force difficutl to renormalise and quantify , because it is not an emergent electromgamtic force for me, I have reached it in changing just the distances and in respecting the newtonian mechanics, this gravitation seems the main chief orchestra and the others forces are just gravitationally emergent in this line of reasoning, that becomes relevamt so to consider these balances between cold and heat , electromagnetism and gravitation, +, ....and if the senses of rotations of 3D quantum spheres are the answer, we can rank all more easily, the gravitation and the time are very simple generally, the complexity appears in the fractalisations of these tools for our universe

About this quantum gravitation, I have seen a relevant paper with Cristi Stoica , by Stephen D. H. Hsu, he utilise the Hilbert spaces, the MWI and the Planck lenghts more the Born rule, the method is very good to read even if it is quantified.The bloch sphere also is taken into account.

I do admit to being inspired by the idea of a Planck scale (

I don't believe in the many world interpretation. There is no empirical evidence for it, and if you think about it, it's ridiculous.

Hi, I beleive the same, I have just spoken about this paper because several general tools are interesting, but I don t agree with the MWI ,regards

.... Well, at the moment of creation, there was this process whereby the value of the Planck toggled in order to make place for more stuff... In other words, when the proto-atom was filled, the Planck slid, under constraint, from a normal distribution to a quantized distribution and to, the next Planck value.

For the new process/new Planck value, the proto-atom appeared empty.

It was filled again and so on, x times. So, I believe there are a number of overlapping universes 'above and below" ours with different Planck values (differnt span/aplitude of time rate)... How many ??? This one is pure hunch; around 240 . Some number in Garrett Lisi's E8 and in cristallography...

Marcel,